THE PRINCIPLES OF CLANSHIP IN HUMAN SOCIETY

Paul Kirchhoff

If one were asked t o s ingle ou t one outstanding s o c i a l phenomenon which dominates the ea r ly evolution of human soc i e ty t h e answer would undoubtedly have t o be t h a t t h i s phenomenon is the clan. Proof f o r t h i g a s se r t i on w i l l hardly be necessary. The decisive r o l e of the clan i n early human h i s to ry manifests i t s e l f i n a s t r i k ing manner i n the fact "tat i t s disappearance as the dominating form of social organization marks t he end o f a whole histori- cal phase, and the beginning of another, i.e., t h a t dominated by s o c i a l classes and t h e i r struggles.

It would, of course, be incor rec t t o say t h a t the h i s t o r y of human soc- i e t y begins only with the emergence of t h e clan. A very important chapter precedes t h i s event. But while the beginning of t h i s chapter of the evolution of human socie ty i s s t i l l characterized by the comparative shapelessness of a l l soc i a l forms, i n i t s l a t e r p a r t t h e subsequent emergence of t he c lan ca s t s its shadows ahead as it were: here the main theme, and consequently the main problem confronting the student, a r e t h e various f a c t s and forms leading to- wards theeanergence of the clan.

One of the outstanding tasks before the s tuden t o f early human society i s , therefore, the study of the various forms the clan has taken i n the course of i t s devlopment, o f the f ac to r s which brought the c lan i n its var i - ous forms into existence, and o f the f a c t o r s which led t o i ts replacement, as the dominating form of soc i a l organization, by o the r forms.

The study of t h i s complex of problems has dominated t he f i r s t decades of anthropological research. Within t h e last two decades ( e d i t o r i a l note: t h i s paper was wr i t t en about 20 years ago) however, it has almost completely receded i n t o the background as a r e s u l t of the p resen t an t i -evo lu t ion i s t t rend of anthropology. ,

The early evolut ionis t school i n anthropology, wi th Morgan as its most g i f t e d spokesman, f e l l i n to an e r ror f o r which anthropology subsequently had t o pay a heavy f ine , i .e . , the f ine of experiencing the growth of an t i - evo lu t ion i s t tendencies the unchecked growth of which today th rea tens anthro- pology with ever-increasing s t e r i l i t y . This error cons i s ted i n replacing the concept of p u l t i l i n e a l evolution, as appl ied by leading students to both na tura l h is tory and the - l a t e r phases of t h e h i s t o r y of socie ty , by the con- cept of sineal evolution, as f p ~ ' as eagl$-soci~ty ' is c b ~ c e ~ n e d . The appl icat ion of t h i s mistaken concept l e d t o the d i s t o r t i o n of many facts,--

and it may be s a i d t h a t anthropology s ince Morgan has t o a very l a r g e ex ten t l i v e d on these d i s t o r t i o n s . It has become t h e fashionable p u r s u i t of many a w r i t e r t o demonstrate t h a t t h e u n i l i n e a l evolutionism of IÂ¥Iorga and o the r s operate with d i s t o r t e d o r mis in terpre ted f a c t s , and that-- therefore-- the f a c t s unearthed by anthropology, both before, and even more so s i n c e piorgan, prove t h e i n a p p l i c a b i l i t y of the concept of evolut ion t o p r imi t ive soc ie ty , --and therefore t o soc ie ty general ly. A l l t h a t has to be done, on the con- t r a ry , i n order t o demonstrate i t s a p p l i c a b i l i t y i s t o replace t h e u n i l i n e a l concept of Morgan by t h e m u l t i l i n e a l concept a s applied i n o ther sciences.

h e of t h e tasks, therefore, which confronts us i n studying the evolut ion of t h e c lan and i t s r o l e i n the h i s t o r y of soc ie ty is to inqu i re which d i f - f e r e n t - forms of -- the c l a n a r e found t o ex i s t , and what t h e i r mutual gene t i c r e l a t i o n is . "The present paper is i n the main confined t o t h i s task.

I1

The most p r i m i t i v e s t age of s o c i e t a l development known snows r e l a t i v e l y small c o m n i t i e s with a food-gathering economy. The coironunities, s e v e r a l o f which are now united by bonds of common speech, customs and b e l i e f s i n t o what usually i s c a l l e d a t r i b e , apparently everywhere cons is t of a nucleus of near r e l a t i v e s ( r e l a t i v e s both by blood and marriage) ,-- t o which nucleus a r e frequently a t tached more d i s t a n t r e l a t i v e s and unrelated indiv iduals who f o r one reason o r another have l e f t t h e i r o r i g i n a l community. Everywhere, howel-er, the dec i s ive element i s the group of r e l a t i v e s , by blood and by marriage. Very f requent ly the community cons is t s only of thi-s group; a married couple and t h e i r unmarried and some of t h e i r married children,-- usually the married sons only, o r the married daughters only, together wi th t h e i r husbands and wives and unmarried children.

Th i s group, and the whole community, i f l a r g e r than t h e kernel of r e l a - f ives, i s by no means a permanent u n i t . Ever again it s p l i t s up i n t o small- er u n i t s of s i m i l a r composition, a t the death of the leading member of t h e community; because of f r i c t i o n between members of the group, e.g. between brothers o r s i s t e r s ; o r simply as t h e r e s u l t of the imposs ib i l i ty o f t h e existence of a group above a certain s i ze i n one l o c a l i t y a t t h i s s t age of economy and organiza t ion . Marriage of a member o f t he comwnity f r equen t ly l eads t o h i s s e t t l i n g apa r t . This l a y s the foundation f o r a new community which i n the course of time w i l l go through the same process as the o r i g i n a l one.

No bond beyond t h a t o f sent iment t i e s the members of t h i s community t o the one i n which they were born. What matters i s where people l i v e a t a given moment: i n o ther words, - t h e concept - of descent -- i s s t i l l completely absent. . -

Relatives by "blood and r e l a t i v e s by marriage are here, as t o t h e i r place i n the community, on a f a r more equal footing than a t any subsequent s t age of s o c i e t a l development.

The t i e s and ob l iga t ions of kinship c u t , of course, across seve ra l such communities, where t h e r e i s in termarr iage 'between several of them. But these t i e s and ob l iga t ions do not themselves cons t i tu te communities. They

therefore , not en t e r

It is, on the other everywhere a t t h i s s tage

i n to our problem d i r ec t l y .

hand, only these t i e s of k insh ip which apparently regula te marriage. I f we confine t h e term "exogamy"

t o the r u l e t ha t marriage must be outs ide of a group l a r g e r than t h a t com- posed of r e l a t i ve s i n the f i r s t degree, and i f we mean by a "groupu a con- s t a n t body of people whose extent i s the same f o r any of i t s members, then the re i s no such thing a s exogamy t o be found a t t h i s s tage . Society he re can s t i l l do without the concept of descent and consequently wi thout the r u l e of exogamy.,

The conditions described here a r e found mainly amongst mere f ood-gather- e r s and hunters, and may be s a i d t o be t y p i c a l f o r them.

I n c e r t a i n cases, however, as e.g. i n many t r i b e s i n t h e Amazon area of South America, where the t i l l i n g of the s o i l has a l ready replaced the mere hunting and col lec t ing of food, and where t h e communities are considerably l a rge r than, l e t us say, those of the Shoshoni o r Apache, the concept o f descent i s nevertheless s t i l l unknown. Such cases undoubtedly p resen t ex- ceptions t o the ru l e t h a t mere food-gathering and hunting go toge ther wi th the absence of groups based on the concept of descent. Lowie i n a r e cen t a r t i c l e (193b: 145) has quoted these South American cases a s proof f o r his. contention t h a t t he r e is " l i t t l e evidence o f complex laws of sequence". It would seem, however, t o be very unsafe t o base such a far- reaching contention on what so obviously a r e exceptional, cases. S imi la r ly f u t i l e i t would be t o a r r i v e a t general conclusions from the reverse cases of e.g., many Austral ians, o r the t r i b e s of t he North American Northwest Coast, where we f i nd more advanced forms of kinship organizat ion combined w i t h lower forms of economy. These instances have to be explaine'd on t h e i nd iv idua l mer i ts of the case, and c l ea r l y be understood as exceptions, due t o except ional h i s t o r i c a l circumstances which i n most cases we probably s h a l l be a b l e t o demonstrate.

I n the overwhelming majority of cases higher forms of economic a c t i v i t y a r e found together with higher forms of kinship organizat ion.

The increasingly cooperative character & economic a c t i y i t y requires - forms of k inshi organization which assure g r e a t w s t a b i l i t y coopw- -- - sting p o 5 d i c h i n primit ive soc ie ty predokinantlY a r e groups of m la t i vc s} . Greater s t a b i l i t y -- of the cooperating groups of r e l a t i v e s r equ i r e s some pr in- c i l e which more c l ea r l y ' se t s o f f one such E u p from the other , s d which &-- a t the same time Bssures t h e i r cont inui tx i n time. 4--- --

The ~ r i n c i p l e of clanship, based on t he concept of descent , does both. - - - I n other words, $hehypothes is advanced here i s t h a t the h i s t o r i c a l funct ion of the c lan i s t o assure s t ab le and continuous cooperation. It takes a number of d i f f e r en t forms, but i t s essence appears t o be t h e same everywhere: t o group together i n one permanent u n i t a l l those persons, l i v i n g and dead, who can claim common descent. This group i s commonly c a l l e d a c lan o r sib. Its invention, i f we may c a l l i t t h a t , i s one of t h e g r e a t e s t achievements of ea r ly man. It provided the form of s o c i a l o rgan iza t ion under which the

the forces of production could grow, slowly bu t s t ead i ly , t o the comparative height a t t a ined e.g. by the mountain t r i b e s of Luzon, with t h e i r magnificent te r raced f i e l d s and i r r i g a t i o n works, or , higher s t i l l , by Homeric soc ie ty .

In t h i s respect , however, and i n the complexity and pe r fec t ion a t t a i n - ed'by the developing forms of k inship organizat ion themselves, t h e r e a r e important, even s t r i k i n g d i f ferences between some of the main forms which the p r inc ip le of c lanship took concretely. To a n t i c i p a t e one of t h e main r e s u l t s of our survey: some of these forms seem t o l ead comparatively e a r l y t o a s tage of s tagnat ion , o r i n t o a b l i n d a l l ey , i f we may say so, while o thers seem t o possess f a r g r e a t e r p o s s i b i l i t i e s of development.

A t t h e present s t a g e of the inves t iga t ion of t h e problem I conceive of these various forms o f clans not as of consecutive s tages, so t h a t one could be explained a s developing o u t of the other, bu t r a t h e r as stemming from the same root , i . e . f r o m t h e more amorphous type of kinship organiza t ion out l ined before. Mhe-ther they a c t u a l l y grew ou t of t h i s common r o o t % same time i s qu i t e another question. I n f a c t it would seem t h a t they, o r a t e a s t s o m e of them, r a t h e r r ep resen t successive branches off t h e same tree. I n other words, while none can be explained out of t h e o thers , s t i l l some appear t o be more archaic, o the r s more recent . This concept, of course, thus f a r but a working hypothesis, and may have t o remain thus f o r a good time, u n t i l a complete survey has been made of the known forms of k inship organizat ion and the o t h e r c u l t u r a l forms accompanying them i n every s p e c i f i c case. The de ta i l ed evidence on which these provis ional conclusions a r e based can unfor tunate ly not be given here f o r reasons of space.

Out of the s e v e r a l forms of c lans which have t o be d is t inguished I shall here omit some, e spec ia l ly t h a t found i n most Austral ian t r i b e s , and s ing le out f o r d i scuss ion two only. It appears t h a t the overwhelming major i ty of t r i b e s whose s o c i a l u n i t s a r e known t o be based on descent, belong t o one o r the other of these two types.

The f i rs t of these two types i s t h a t of u n i l a t e r a l exogamous c lans -, e i t h e r of the p a t r i l i n e a l o r m a t r i l i n e a l var ie ty . ' Since these two v a r i e t i e s are a l ike i n a n o t h e r po in t s except t h a t one is matr i l inea l , the o the r p a t r i l i n e a l , no a t t e n t i o n needs t o be pa id here t o t h i s difference, s ince our main aim is t o shew what d i s t ingu i shes both of them from the o the r type - of c l a n which is n e i t h e r un i l a t e ra l . nor exogamous.

The formative f e a t u r e s of t h e f i r s t ty-ie of clan, i n both of i t s v a r i e t i e s , are (1) the c lan c o n s i s t s of people who a r e r e l a t e d t o each other e i t h e r through women only o r through men only,-- according to the custom of t h e tribe; ( 2 ) every member of t h e c l a n i s , as f a r a s c lan membership goes, on an absolutely equal f o o t i n g w i t h t h e r e s t : the nearness of r e l a t i o n t o each o ther or t o some ances tor be ing of no consequence f o r a person's place i n the clan; (3 ) members of t h e c l a n may not marry each other.

I n o ther words, t h e p r i n c i p l e s underlying t h i s type of clan are : uni- l a t e r a l , equa l i t a r i an t1 , exogamous. They c o n s t i t u t e one ind iv i s ib le whole. It i s no acc ident t h a t p r a c t i c a l l y everywhere we f ind one of them we f i n d

the other two. Neither of them would, i n f a c t , by i t s e l f , produce the same resu l t .

These three pr inciples of clanship, o r r a t h e r t h i s th reefo ld pr inciple , leads t o sharply defined, c lea r ly separate un i t s , comparable t o so many blocks out of which socie ty i s bu i l t . There have t o be always a t l e a s t two such blocks, - two clans l iv ing i n communion. Usually there a r c more than two.

The most s t r i k ing aspect of t h i s th reefo ld p r i n c i p l e of clanship is i t s extreme r i g id i t y . It i s hard t o imagine i n which d i r e c t i o n t h i s type of clan could develop fur ther . The c l a s s i ca l form i n which we know it from hundreds of t r i be s seams t o exhaust a l l i t s p o s s i b i l i t i e s , and no forms lead- ing beyond it seem t o have been reported from anywhere, - unless t h e Aus- t r a l i a n systems should f a l l i n to t h i s category.

This type of c lan makes possible a kind of economic and general cu l t u r a l cooperation which i n i t s way seems perfect . But, as t h e term pe r f ec t i m - p l i e s , it seems t o be the highest type of cooperation which can be achieved along t h i s l i n e of development. The growing forces of production a t a em- - t a i n s tage demand important readjustments i n the form of k insh ip organization of which t h i s type appears t o be incapable. I t s absolute equal i tar iansim, combined with the complote subordination of each of i t s members t o the i n - t e r e s t s of the clan as a whole, while making poss ible a c e r t a i n type of primitive cooperation, obst ructs very e f f e c t i v e l y t h e evolut ion of those higher forms of cooperation which a r e based upon economic and s o c i a l d i f f e r - ent ia t ion. Where therefore within t h i s type of c lan higher forms o f econ- omy have come in to existence, as e.g. those based on animal breeding, t h e '

development of which requires higher forms of cooperation, there t h i s new economy has usually not gone beyond ra ther meagre beginnings. It is, on the other hand, s ign i f ican t t ha t t h e forms of i r r i g a t e d a g r i c u l t u r e found amongst so-called primitive t r i be s appear t o be in. t he main confined t o t r i b e s with thessecond type of clan, the cha rac t e r i s t i c s of which we w i l l describe pre- sently.

The f i r s t type of clan, the un i l a t e r a l , equa l i t a r i an , exogamous clan, i s i n the main typ ica l of t r i b e s with migratory a g r i c u l t u r e or wi th primitive forms of animal breeding, it i s probably no accident t h a t i t i s found above a l l i n those par t s of the worlds-where c u l t u r a l development seems t o have reached a point of stagnation, except where sub jec t t o fo r e ign s t imul i , -- i .e . i n the western hemisphere, i n l a rge p a r t s o f Negro Afr ica , i n Melanesia and New Guinea.

The form o f kinship organization which the unila-beral-exogamous pr in - c ip l e of clanship creates appears d e f i n i t e l y a s a blind, a l l ey , and more than tha t : a t a ce r ta in stage of economic and genera l c u l t u r a l evolut ion as an obstacle t o fu r ther development. What cons t i t u t e s i t s greatness a t the same time const i tu tes i t s limits.

We a r e presented with a s t r i k ing ly d i f f e r e n t p i c tu r e t h e moment w e tu rn t o tho second type of clan, found amongst the e a r l y Indo-European and

Semitic -bribes, amongst the Polynesians and Indonesians, including the inhabitants of the Phil ippines, and a few t r i b e s I n o the r p a r t s of the world. A t whatever s tage of development we f ind these t r i be s , we d i s - cover i n t h e i r economic and soc i a l l i f e fac to rs making f o r f u r t he r evol- ution, everywhere i n t h e d i r ec t i on of f u r t he r economic and soc i a l d i f f e r - entiat ion.

What then i s the type of c lan found among these t r i be s? The answer to t h i s question is not a simple one, at airy ra te not i f a simple desig- nation l i k e ~unilateral~,~exQ.gamous~, e t c . i s expected. I n f a c t the very names "clann, "sib", "gensu, e tc . , while taken from the vocabulary of t r i b e s having t he second type of clan, have been f o r such a long time and so exclusively used f o r clans of the f i r s t , i. e. the unilateral-exogamous type, t h a t it is very d i f f i c u l t indeed t o break down the confusion which anthropologists themselves have created. This confusion consis ts i n the be l i e f t h a t the unilateral-exogamous c l a n i s the c l an , and t h a t everything else, including the clan of the Gaels, the of the Germans, and t he Gens of the Romans, is a devia t ion from, o r a t any r a t e a specia l develop- ment of t he type of c lan found among t he Iroquois o r i n the Trobriand Isl- ands. If there i s one question i n which there i s f u l l continuity from Morgan t o our own day, then it is t h i s misconception.

Very few indeed a r e the anthropologists who have t r i e d t o understand the clans e.g. of the Polynesians as a type i n i t s e l f , a s opposed t o t h a t e.g. of the Melanesians. And the re i s hardly any modern anthropologist who has t r i e d t o re-evaluate the p r i nc ip l e s underlying the clans and s i b s and gentes of t he ear ly Indo-European t r i be s . In f a c t it has somehow become a hab i t t o shun t r i b e s which have t h i s type of clan, both i n l i b - ra ry research and i n f i e l d work. They do not f i t i n t o the accustomed pattern. Yet it i s p rec i se ly the s tudy of these t r i b e s which w i l l allow us t o bridge t he s t i l l - e x i s t i n g gulf between the f a c t s of anthropology and those of ea r ly European his tory . These t r ibes a r e closer t o our own ,

past than any others, and i f anthropology aims a t being a "usefuln science i n the sense t h a t i t s researches and f indings f i t i n t o a l a rger body of s c i e n t i f i c knowledge, then w e must undoubtedly pay more a t t en t ion t o t r i b e s the study of which promises t o g ive us the key to the e a r l i e s t wr i t t en h i s to ry of t h e Jews, t he Greeks, the Romans, the Germans, etc. Thus f a r anthropology has completely f a i l e d i n t h i s t a sk which Morgan regarded as one of t he main t asks of our science. In f a c t there a r e probably very few anthropologists today who would agree t ha t t h i s - i s one of the main tasks of anthropology.

The decisive di f ference between t h e f i r s t and the second type of clan is t h a t what matters i n t h e one i s re la t ionship through e i t he r men o r women (according t o the custom of t h e t r ibe ) , i r respect ive of the nearness of such re la t ionsh ip t o t h e other members of the group t o some ancestor, whereas on t h e contrary i n the other type it i s pre- c i se ly the nearness of r e l a t i onsh ip t o t he common ancestor o f the group which matters. The f i r s t of t h e two pr inc ip les of clanship r e su l t s i n a group the members of which a r e of absolute ly equal standing, a s f a r as t h i s standing i s determined by membership i n the group (leaving as ide the question of age). The second p r i n c i p l e r e su l t s i n a group i n which every s ingle member, except brothers o r s i s t e r s , has a d i f fe ren t standing; the

concept of the degree of re la t ionship l eads t o d i f f e r e n t degrees of mem- bership i n the clan. In other words, some a r e members t o a higher degree than others.

The log ica l consequence of t h i s s t a t e of a f f a i r s i s that, a t a c e r t a i n po in t it becomes dimbtful whether a person i s s t i l l t o be regarded a member of a c e r t a in clan, a question t ha t could never a r i s e i n a unilateral-exogam- ous clan. Clan membership so t o speak shades o f f t h e f a r t h e r one i s away from the center-l ine of the clan-. - the r e a l core of t h e group. This core, t he a r i s t o i , consis ts of those who a re , or a r e supposed t o be descendants of t he common ancestor of the clan.

In most t r i b e s wi th t h i s second type of c lan descent i s customarily counted e i t h e r through men o r , more ra re ly , through women, b u t very freq- uently, especia l ly i n the case of t h e a r i s t o i , descent may be counted through e i t h e r o f them. That s ide ' being chosen which gives a person a higher descent, L e . , a c loser re la t ionsh ip with t h e ancestor of the group. The term flambilateralll has been coined f o r t h i s system ( F i r t h , 1929).

Genealogies, unknown and unnecessary i n a u n i l a t e r a l c lan, a re here the means of es tabl ishing the " l ine" of descent of t h e nobles, t h i s " l ineN being another concept unknown i n u n i l a t e r a l clans.

A corol lary o f the second pr inc ip le of c lanship i s t h a t t he r e i s no exogamy i n the sense defined above. I n f a c t the re could be none, s ince there are no groups with de f in i t e and f i xed "boundariesu. On the contrary we f i nd frequently a tendency towards c lose endogamy, however usua l ly only f o r the a r i s t o i . Marriage between r e l a t i v e s of high descent assures t h a t t h e i r offspring w i l l be of s t i l l higher descent.

The type of p re fe ren t ia l marriage most c h a r a c t e r i s t i c f o r t h i s type of clan i s t h a t with p a r a l l e l r e l a t i v e s : t h e b r o t h e r ' s daughter and o r the f a t h e r ' s brother ' s daughter. We f i n d t h i s marriage a l l t h e way from ancient Prussia, Greece, and Arabia, t o the Kwakiutl of t h e North American North- west Coast who together with the Nutka seem t o be the only represen ta t ives of t h i s type of clan organization on North American s o i l . Marriage wi th e i t he r the b ro ther ' s daughter o r t he f a t h e r ' s b r o t h e r ' s daughter may be almost regarded as a " l e i t f o s s i l " of t h i s type o f clan.

Another type of p re fe ren t ia l marriage found f requent ly w i th it i s marriage with a ha l f - s i s te r , i . e . , a s i s t e r by the same f a t h e r , bu t a d i f f e r en t mother. Neither of these two types of p r e f e r e n t i a l marriage seems t o be ever found i n soc ie t i es organized i n t o unilateral-exogamous clans.

The d i s t i nc t i on between r u l e s of behavior f o r t h e noble core o f t he c lan and f o r i t s outer f r inge runs through a l l s o c i e t i e s organized i n t o clans of the second type. It i s the f ea tu r e which most c l e a r l y and sharply s e t s off t h i s type of clan from the t l equa l i t a r ian" unilateral-exogamous clan, and it i s t h i s feature which l i e s a t t h e r o o t of the very d i f f e r e n t r o l e which t r i b e s organized i n to the one o r the o t h e r type o f c lan have played i n the his tory of mankind. I n f a c t t h i s d i f fe rence i nev i t ab ly

flows from the opposi te p r inc ip les which determine t h e s t r uc tu r e of these two types of clans. The one divides t h e t r i b e i n to a number of s o l i d blocks with clear-cut boundary l i n e s , each homogenous within. The other r e su l t s i n a type of soc ie ty which may be l ikened t o a cone: the whole t r jbk being one such cone, with the legendary m ces tor a t i ts top, but within it a r e a l a r g e r or smaller number of s imi lar cones, the top of each coinciding with o r being connected with t h e top of the whole cone. The bases of these cones, represent t h e c i r c l e of l i v ing members of t h e various clans a t a given moment, overlap here and there.

The t r i b e a s a whole has e s s en t i a l l y the same s t ruc tu re a s each of i t s ccmp.~nent par ts : i t i s therefore only a question of a choice of words whether we c a l l both of them '! tr ibeN, o r both of them "clanu, o r t h e l a rge r one " t r i b e v and t he smaller ones "clans! . Professor Boas d i f f i c u l t i e s i n h i s prfeseritation-'of Kwakiutl kinship 'organization i l l u s t r a t e t h i s point ,

Any one of t he se cones, l a rge or small, can e x i s t by i t s e l f . With the unilateral-exogamous type of clan, on the other hand, always a t l e a s t two clans must ex i s t , and t h e body comprising two, o r more, of them together does i t s e l f - not have t he s t r uc tu r e of a clan.

In other words,, t h e two types of clan d i f f e r i n every s ing le aspect, except t h e basic one, namely t h a t they a r e both --- based on the p r i nc ip l e - of descent ( though a d i f f e r en t one).

I n s o c i e t i e s of the '!concialH clan type it i s regarded a s a matter of course that a l l leading economic, social , r e l ig ious functions a r e reserved, t o t ho se of highest descent, i . e , those c loses t t o the ancestor of the clan and t r i be , who f requen t ly i s regarded as a god. 'With the develop- ment of production and of cu l t u r e a s a whole the r o l e of these a r i s t o i within the l i f e of the c lan and t h e t r i b e becomes ever more important. The nearer i n descent t o the godlike ancestor a person is, t he greater a r e h i s chances i n t he process of ever-growing economic and soc ia l d i f fe ren t ia t ion . Socia l d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n a t t h i s s t age of evolution of society (as well a s of o thers fol lowing it) the indispensable concomitant of higher forms of cooperation, n o t only finds no obs tac le i n t h i s type of clan, but on the contrary an extremely f l ex ib l e medium, namely a hierarchy of re la t ives , based on t he p r i n c i p l e of nearness of descent.

For a long per iod to come t h i s p r inc ip le of clanship i s able t o adapt i t s e l f t o the ever-growing complexity of property re la t ions . A survey of the t r i b e s organized i n t o c lans of t h i s 'type shows a whole s ca l e of such adaptat ions t o t h e increas ing degree of soc i a l d i f fe ren t ia t ion within the t r i b e : mainly along the l i n e of a more marked s t r a t i f i c a t i o n of the members of one and t h e same group. Thus some members of the clan may be chiefs and. near-gods, while others, a t the opposite end of the scale , may be s laves : y e t a l l of them a r e regarded a s re la t ives , and i n many cases a re ab l e t o prove it. (eeg . among t h e h t k a ) .

The process of d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n within the clan, while for a long time taking place w i th in t h i s f l e x i b l e u n i t , f i n a l l y reaches the point where the i n t e r e s t s of t h o s e of equal standing, in a l l the clans of the t r ibe , - o r even a number of t r i b e s , come i n t o such sharp conf l ic t with the i n t e r e s t s

of the other s t r a t a t h a t t h e i r s truggle, the s t r ugg l e of by now fully-fledged I soc i a l classes, overshadows the old p r i nc ip l e s of c lansh ip and f i n a l l y l eads I t o the break-up of t he clan, f i r s t a s the dominating form of s o c i a l organ- i i z a t i o n and then to i t s f i n a l disappearance. This po in t , t h e end of one phase of human h i s to ry , and the beginning of another, has j u s t been reached

I 1

when t he Greeks, the Romans and the Germans en te r t he l i g h t of documented f

his tory . t t t f t

However none of the t r i b e s with which anthropology u sua l l y dea l s have 1 . 6 reached t h i s stage. The h ighes t s t age found here is, on the contrary, one ! 4; where i t i s s t i l l t o the advantage o f the a r i s t o i t o keep t h e clan orga'.niza- f

t i o n i n t a c t because it s t i l l serves them a s the b e s t ins t rument i n t h e i r v $ ; s i i s t rugg le aga ins t t h e lower orders. The reason f o r t h i s i s n o t d i f f i c u l t ' * IS

t o see. I n clans of the unilateral-exogamous type t h e ob l i ga t i ons and - ? $1 i p r iv i l ege s of every c lan member i n t h e f i n a l account equal each other. Whatever benef i t s the individual benef i t s t h e c lan a s a whole, and reverse ly whatever strengthens the clan strengthens every one of i t s members i n an equal measure. In t h i s l i e s t h e greatness, bu t a t the same time t he l im i t a t i ons of t h i s type of clan. I n t he "cone-shapedu clan, on t he contrary, everthing t ha t s trengthens the clan s t renthens above a l l i t s core, and correspond- ingly: whatever any member contributes t o the wel fa re of t h e c l an as a whole bene f i t s above a l l the a r i s t o i .

ilw

Up t o a ce r ta in po in t of economic and genera l c u l t u r a l development t h i s strengthening of the core of t h e c l an means a t t h e same time a strengthening

g of the whole clan. But i n the course of time t h i s becomes l e s s and l e s s y t rue . The i n t e r e s t s of t h e a r i s t o i , and t o a l e s s e r degree those of t h e middle s t r a t a where these have come i n t o exis tence , become ever more separa te I@ from and f i n a l l y opposed t o the i n t e r e s tb of t h e group a s a whole. But the bonds of clanship s t i l l exis t , and, up t o a c e r t a i n point , it i s t o f ;! the advantage of the a r i s t o i t o u t i l i z e them aga in s t the o the r s t r a t a

^Is ;q within the clan. 1111 Iff

V I I

The most i n s t ruc t i ve example of t h i s s t a t e of a f f a i r s i s offered by the Igoro t t r i b e s of t he n o r t h m o s t of the Ph i l ipp ine I s l ands , Luzon. Amongst these t r i b e s whose economy i s based on t e r r aced a g r i c u l t u r e and i r r i g a t i o n we a r e ab le t o study ce r ta in r a t h e r embryonic forms of s t r ugg l e between the developing c lasses of landlords and l and l e s s . Both s i de s f i g h t here completely wi thin the confines of t he old c lan organizat ion which i s s t i l l f u l l y i n t ac t . The s t rugg le has c e r t a i n outward forms of a r e l i g i o u s character which, however, do no t conceal t o the observer the e s s e n t i a l s of the struggle.

Both wedding and funeral nece s s i t a t e among t h e s e t r i b e s the s a c r i f i c i a l s laughter ing of a p ig by tne nea r e s t r e l a t i ve . The major i ty of t h e pop- u la t ion , however, have no pigs. I f they s t i l l own a p iece o f l and they have t o pawn it t o a r i c h man i n order t o g e t the requ i red p ig . If t hey have '

already, a t a previous occasion, l o s t t h e i r land, they have t o work o f f the p r i c e of the pig.

Thus t h e concentrat ion of land i n the hands of a few proceeds a t a r ap id pace*

The mechanism "tough which -this process opera tes i s the equa l i ty of obl igat ions, on t h e sur face r e l i g i o u s in character, f o r every member o f t h e clan, be he r i c h o r poor. The cont inuat ion of equal ob l iga t ions un- questionalby works t o the advantage of some a g a i n s t o thers , a t a moment when the development of t h e fo rces of production has a l r eady l ed t o f a r - reaching economic and. s o c i a l d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . Now the important p o i n t f o r our problem i n a l l t h i s l i e s i n the f a c t t h a t both contending s i d e s a r e very frequently, poss ib ly i n t h e ma jo r i ty of cases, members of the same clan. I n f a c t they a r e under t h e mutual ob l iga t ion of blood vengeance. Bu t th i s obl igat ion too, under t h e condit ions o f economic m e q u a l i t y and of t h e p e c u l i a r i t i e s o f this type of c l an system, works t o t h e advantage of t h e a r i s t o i who can more o r l e a s f o r c e the l e s s e r members of t h e c l an t,o come to t h e i r ass is tance , and thus through composition f i n e s ext rac ted from t h e offender, a r e a b l e t o continuously inc rease t h e i r resources, which i n tu rn gives them s t i l l greater hold over t h e i r poorer c lan fellows.

Ihe r o l e which t h i s p r i n c i p l e of c lanship p lays here, a t a cornparatlively advanced s tage of the evolut ion of economy and s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s , shows i t s extraordinary f l e x i b i l i t y and a d a p t i b i l i t y . I ts c o n t r a s t t o the r i g i d u n i l a t e r a l exogamous p r i n c i p l e of c lanship i s s t r i k i n g . However t h i s c o n t r a s t should no t induce us to overlook t h e f a c t t h a t both of these p r i n c i p l e s of clanship and t h e form of c lan t o which they lead belong e s s e n t i a l l y t o the same phase o f t h e evolut ion of soc ie ty . If we compare them e i t h e r with the s t age of k insh ip organiza t ion which preceded it, or v i t h the breakdown of kinship organiiation; ' which followed, it, the common f e a t u r e of both types of clan become apparen t ; both a re based on t h e concept of descent which, by grouping the l i v i n g and t h e dead together i n t o s t a b l e and permanent u n i t s , permits of higher f o r m s of cooperat ion than those known before.

One of them however, seems through i t s r i g i d i t y t o lead i n t o a b l ind a l l ey , whi le the other, more f l e x i b l e , has become the form wi th in which i n a long course of evolu t ion s o c i a l d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n reached the po in t where it led t o the formation o f s o c i a l c l a s ses and i t s own consequent des t ruc t ion .

F i r th , R. W. 1929, Primi t ive Economics of t h e New Zealand Maori. London.

Lowie, R- L* 3.934. "Social Organization" I n Encyclopedia of Soc ia l Sciences, vol. 14,

pp. 141-148-